cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Partition size
Date Mon, 12 Sep 2016 13:44:08 GMT
In US english it is also debatable over which words are profane.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profanity
Different words can be profanity to different people, and what words are
thought of as profanity in English can change over time.

Suggestion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0MK7qz13bU

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith <benedict@apache.org
> wrote:

> The guidelines stipulate no "excessive or unnecessary" profanity.  Perhaps
> you also decide what qualifies as necessary or non-excessive?
>
> To summarise my view of this entire discussion: policing users is just...
> mind boggling. Well worthy of profanity.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12 September 2016 at 14:16, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/2016 12:51, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote:
>>
>> Please tone down your language. There is no need for profanity.
>>
>> Now is probably a good time to remind everyone of the Apache Code of
>> Conduct:
>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html
>>
>>
>> >     (a link to 3rd party docs in response to a question when an
>> >     equivalent link to project hosted docs was available)
>> >
>> >
>> > No, it wasn't.  Or at least the link you sent was not remotely the same
>> > as the link in the email you responded to, which was about how to
>> > understand your partition sizes - not the configuration parameter.
>> > Possibly you responded to the wrong email.
>>
>> I did respond to the wrong e-mail. I apologise for any confusion caused.
>> I intended to respond to this message:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6a68da3467b1fe8fe96c1be
>> de135d329419b78bf3cc3912e727304db@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E
>>
>> rather than this one:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/39a47ddf3cdecf6a196967b
>> a679c30d65279a2afc05a2588e8c69bac@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E
>>
>> I must have clicked on the wrong message in the thread as I moved
>> between windows.
>>
>> >     Any member of a project community (contributor, committer or PMC
>> >     member)
>> >
>> >
>> > Right.  But policing /users/ (which Mark most certainly is) is just
>> > douchebaggery.  Users should feel free to participate with the resources
>> > /they know best /without fear of reprisal.  All of your statement
>> > suggests this shit belongs on the dev list.
>>
>> Users are as much part of the community as anyone else.
>>
>> > Or are we really suggesting that anyone discussing things on the user
>> > list must be 100% conversant with the "official" docs before they can
>> > make any kind of posting to the list?  Or otherwise they can expect to
>> > be attacked by other community members?
>>
>> I am not saying that at all. I am saying that, unless there is a good
>> reason, links to documentation - particularly reference documentation -
>> should be to the official Apache hosts docs in preference to links to a
>> third party.
>>
>> > Talk about chilling.  I do not see this promoting engagement - who wants
>> > to help other users out if this is what they can expect in return?  A
>> > public shaming?
>>
>> My response was not to Mark, but to the community as a whole. It was not
>> intended as either a reprimand or a shaming. If Mark feels differently,
>> then I apologise. My intention was to make a simple request to the
>> community as a whole to reference the official documentation in
>> preference to 3rd party docs unless there was a good reason.
>>
>> >     Linking to third party docs, blogs, etc is fairly common but they
>> >     tend to be linked by the OP in the form of "I've followed the
>> >     instructions I found here and it doesn't work".
>> >
>> >
>> > Bullshit. Try a simple google
>> > search: site:https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cassandra-user/
>> > thelastpickle.com/blog <http://thelastpickle.com/blog>
>> >
>> > There are 500 results.  For just one external resource.  I don't recall
>> > a single one of these resulting in a reprimand.  Try the first three
>> > links from the search - they do not fit /any/ of your characterisations
>> > of "normal" - but they do fit mine.
>>
>> None of which, according to Google, have been made since I joined the
>> list in August. The past is the past and I don't see how a review of any
>> of those posts helps the project.
>>
>> There are also ~1500 references to docs.datastax.com. I don't think
>> reviewing those posts would help either.
>>
>> I'll note that the search didn't turn up this post (probably because of
>> the combined delay in mail-archives.a.o updating and Google indexing the
>> site):
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7f60b641c40e5e7ba9c7c5c
>> 90eee47a94e5ce8690450c7617adc4a41@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E
>>
>> That is a good example of the "more involved" question I referred to
>> previously. Hopefully, some of that information will find its way into
>> the architecture section of the official docs.
>>
>> > Perhaps you can link the history of projects attacking users for their
>> > email content?
>>
>> I did say that linking to 3rd party reference docs rather than the
>> official reference docs as part of an answer to a question was unusual.
>> In the Apache community I know best, Tomcat, I do recall it happening a
>> few times but less than once a year. I don't recall any of the specifics
>> so finding a reference in the ~150k user@ list messages over the last 10
>> years is a tall order. I did try, but finding a reference is going to
>> take more time than I have.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> > On 12 September 2016 at 12:10, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org
>> > <mailto:markt@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> >     On 09/09/2016 21:11, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote:
>> >     > Come on. This kind of inconsistent 'policing' is not helpful.
>> >
>> >     How is it inconsistent? Since I subscribed to the mailing list on 22
>> >     August, this is the first instance I have seen of anyone providing a
>> >     link to third party docs rather than the equivalent project hosted
>> docs
>> >     in response to a user question. If I missed any, please point them
>> out.
>> >     The lists are pretty busy and that, combined with my minimal
>> technical
>> >     knowledge of Cassandra, means it is perfectly possible I missed
>> some.
>> >
>> >     I've done a quick double check of the user@ archives and while I
>> do see
>> >     a number of messages referencing 3rd party docs, those references
>> were
>> >     made by the OP rather than someone from the community providing an
>> >     answer.
>> >
>> >     > By all means, push the /*committers*/ to improve the project docs
>> >     as is
>> >     > happening, and to promote the internal resources over external
>> ones.
>> >     >
>> >     > But Mark has absolutely no formal connection with the project,
>> and his
>> >     > contributions have only been to file a couple of JIRA (all of
>> which have
>> >     > so far been ignored by those of his colleagues who /are/ active
>> >     > community members, I'll note!).  Shaming him for not linking docs
>> that
>> >     > describe something /other/ than what he was even talking about is
>> >     > crossing the line IMO.
>> >
>> >     Any member of a project community (contributor, committer or PMC
>> member)
>> >     directing users to 3rd party docs in preference to project docs
>> without
>> >     a good reason is missing an opportunity to strengthen that project
>> >     community.
>> >
>> >     > Linking to third-party resources is commonplace, the only
>> difference I
>> >     > can see here is that these have been called "docs"  by the
>> authors,
>> >     > instead of a blog post, and Mark has a DataStax email address.
>> >
>> >     Linking to third party reference docs for an Apache project in
>> response
>> >     to a configuration question about that Apache project on one of the
>> >     project's mailing lists is pretty unusual.
>> >
>> >     Linking to third party docs, blogs, etc is fairly common but they
>> tend
>> >     to be linked by the OP in the form of "I've followed the
>> instructions I
>> >     found here and it doesn't work". The responses to such questions
>> >     typically include links to the relevant parts of the Apache hosted
>> docs.
>> >
>> >     If the question is more involved then I have seen links to blogs,
>> >     presentations, YouTube etc provided as an answer. If this happens
>> >     multiple times for the same topic then it is usually added to an
>> FAQ,
>> >     wiki or similar along with an e-mail to the author to see if they'd
>> be
>> >     willing to contribute something to the docs.
>> >
>> >     > Would you have reacted this way if Aaron Morton linked a blog
>> post by
>> >     > thelastpickle?  Or a random user posted their own resources?
>> Obviously not.
>> >
>> >     Wrong. My reaction was based on the content of the message (a link
>> to
>> >     3rd party docs in response to a question when an equivalent link to
>> >     project hosted docs was available) not on who sent it or their
>> employer.
>> >
>> >     > I was initially all for the ASF endeavour to counteract DataStax'
>> >     > outsized influence on the project, and was hopeful you might
>> achieve
>> >     > some positive change.  Perhaps you may well still do.  But it
>> seems to
>> >     > me that the ASF behaviour is beginning to cross from constructive
>> >     > criticism of the project participants to prejudicially hostile
>> behaviour
>> >     > against certain community members - and that is unlikely to
>> result in a
>> >     > better project.
>> >     >
>> >     > You should be treating everyone consistently, in a manner that
>> promotes
>> >     > project health.
>> >
>> >     It is not healthy if community members are directing users to 3rd
>> party
>> >     documentation in preference to the project's own documentation. If
>> it is
>> >     happening because the project's documentation is non-existent /
>> wrong /
>> >     poorly written / etc. then that is understandable (and would be an
>> issue
>> >     the project needed to address) but that was not the case in this
>> >     instance.
>> >
>> >     There are many aspects to community health. In the grand scheme of
>> >     things the single e-mail that started this particular discussion is
>> in
>> >     the noise. However, a consistent pattern of such e-mails would be
>> much
>> >     more troubling. My intent was to ensure that such a pattern did not
>> >     form.
>> >
>> >     Whether people agree with my response or not, the community is
>> hopefully
>> >     more aware of the issue than it was previously.
>> >
>> >     Mark
>> >
>> >
>> >     > On Friday, 9 September 2016, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org
>> <mailto:markt@apache.org>
>> >     > <mailto:markt@apache.org <mailto:markt@apache.org>>>
wrote:
>> >     >
>> >     >     On 09/09/2016 16:46, Mark Curtis wrote:
>> >     >     > If your partition sizes are over 100MB iirc then you'll
>> >     normally see
>> >     >     > warnings in your system.log, this will outline the partition
>> >     key, at
>> >     >     > least in Cassandra 2.0 and 2.1 as I recall.
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > Your best friend here is nodetool cfstats which shows you
>> the
>> >     >     > min/mean/max partition sizes for your table. It's quite
>> >     often used to
>> >     >     > pinpoint large partitons on nodes in a cluster.
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > More info
>> >     >     > here:
>> >     >
>> >      https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/tools/t
>> oolsCFstats.html
>> >     <https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/
>> tools/toolsCFstats.html>
>> >     >
>> >      <https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/tools/
>> toolsCFstats.html
>> >     <https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/
>> tools/toolsCFstats.html>>
>> >     >
>> >     >     Folks,
>> >     >
>> >     >     It is *Apache* Cassandra. If you are going to point to docs,
>> >     please
>> >     >     point to the official Apache docs unless there is a very good
>> >     reason
>> >     >     not to.
>> >     >
>> >     >     In this case:
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >      http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassand
>> ra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb
>> >     <http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassa
>> ndra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb>
>> >     >
>> >      <http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassan
>> dra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb
>> >     <http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassa
>> ndra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb>>
>> >     >
>> >     >     looks to the place.
>> >     >
>> >     >     Mark
>> >     >
>> >     >
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > Thanks
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > Mark
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     > On 9 September 2016 at 02:53, Anshu Vajpayee
>> >     <anshu.vajpayee@gmail.com <mailto:anshu.vajpayee@gmail.com>
>> >     >     > <mailto:anshu.vajpayee@gmail.com
>> >     <mailto:anshu.vajpayee@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     >     Is there any way to get partition size for a  partition
>> >     key ?
>> >     >     >
>> >     >     >
>> >     >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message